Skip to main content
6:30 am
raise your right hand. >> aye. >> chair: by unanimous vote, co-chair has been reelected for a second year. do you wish to give a speech? >> i will continue to learn. by mail. so you can continue to teach me, and tap my arm, when i'm doing something wrong. i'm sure carla and joanna and everyone else will keep me in-line. >> i can still tune into you guys.
6:31 am
i happened to tune in to a meeting, a committee meeting a couple of weeks ago and i called in beforehand. i had a feed in to your committee meeting. you guys are on stage all the time. >> okay, kim, you have to get the bridge line working. i need her help. >> chair: in three months there will be an election for my chair, vacated at the end of the year. we are looking at some action items. our next item, action items, proposed amendments. the m d c bylawys.
6:32 am
should go over them, one by one, vote for them. does the staff wish to identify the proposed amendments? >> i would be willing to do an introduction one at a time/ there has been discussion, set term limits. the appropriate thing is to bring it to the council for discussion and action. staff has written these proposed changes for the sake of discussion, not anything carved in stone. or not adopted. so, currently, the only thing that says, in the current bylaws for chairs, there shall
6:33 am
be two co-chairs the service officers of the council. the council shall elect these officers. officer terms shall be one year. it is not say - the terms may be staggered by not less than three months. the idea was not to have another election for a co-chair right away so we have a job like jul was talking about. the idea was to have term limits, recommendation was too strong a word. co-chair shall serve a maximum
6:34 am
of two terms. does anyone want to make a motion? if not, the bylaws can stay as they are. >> chair: why do we break down the proposed amendments one by one. article 3a, proposed amendment that cochairs can serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. we need a motion for approval. a second and then we have discussion. >> i will like a point of clarification. >> chair: councilmember supanich. >> does that prevent someone
6:35 am
from taking off a term and coming back? >> the bylaws would be silent and would not prevent someone from taking a year off as currently written. >> all right. >> chair: because it says "consecutive". >> right. >> chair: councilmember wilson? >> councilmember wilson: is that four years? two. >> i would like to make a motion to adopt it. >> i will second the. >> chair: co-chair james/ ? okay. we had two questions. i have a question. we have not had a motion to
6:36 am
approve is yet or a second. did we? who made a motion to approve? co-chair james, councilmember supanich. now we are open for discussion and public comment. have a question about the intent of the proposed amendment. i am suspecting the intent by the author is to encourage and engage more councilmember leadership opportunities. what would happen if that were not the result? let's hope that would not be the case if that comes into approval. maybe that option, discussion?
6:37 am
councilmember wilson? >> i do not understand what you just said. i do not understand it. if no one wants if n o one wa ntsto step up? >> chair: let me make an attempt to clarify. from my experience in the past, attempting to promote more leadership opportunities for colleagues, i've noticed that a lot of times it is tough to initiate that the person who proposes a leadership role. that is my concern. if they were persons not able or willing to fulfill the leadership role, do you put the council at risk by making a
6:38 am
maximum of two consecutive terms. does that make sense? that is a question i have. councilmember supanich. >> i like to see a system by which people are prepared for the post. that might be a requirement that they chair one of the subcommittees for a period of six months or a year. it might be that there is a period for which the exiting co-chair and entering co-chair are together, mentoring for a few months so some of us don't feel that we are thrown to the wolves. and also not intimidated for volunteering or nominate themselves. the process of mentoring mic event that situation from happening.
6:39 am
>> chair: may interpret that as a from the amendment? >> yes that is a friendly amendment. >> chair: don't let me put words in your mouth. basically we are saying co-chairs conservative maximum of two consecutive terms provided they have completed a six-month term leading a council committee. >> what i want to see is to encourage people- because right now, it seems like we have gone time without a councilmember chairing a subcommittee. to ensure that those roles are filled, people get confident taking steps getting to the top rather than starting at the top. i want a system where we are
6:40 am
collecting on a regular basis committee chairs and members. so i'm not sure how i want to amend this. or this should be a separate motion completely. i am trying to address their concerns by saying that there are things we can do to prevent that from happening. i don't think i want to amend the motion as it stands. i want to see the motion passed. i speak in favor of the motion as it stands. >> chair: i think it's a good option. we have two people in the queue. suggested amendment. councilmember wilson then wong. >> you don't want to be dumped somewhere. you want to be mentored. that is different from the amendment. maybe we can add to that in
6:41 am
our executive -- when you do take a leadership role mentoring maybe two months before the person comes into the office of the other person. i would hope that would not happen, but no one wants to take the leadership roles. that's why we take the seats to encourage other people to take leadership positions. i hope we never have that and every one of us would love the opportunity to do something as dynamic as you have done for three different mayors. >> chair: thank you. councilmember wong followed by mr. stein. >> councilmember wong: i can understand everyone's feeling about taking a leadership. i was a person not into leading
6:42 am
committees. slowly but surely, like i said earlier, i'm slowly getting up to that rank. i was just appointed to the m d c's physical assets committee, my little training. maybe in the future i can become the chair of the mayor's disability council. i like the idea, for sure. >> chair: mr. stein? >> yes. i don't see any conflict between staying two consecutive terms, and the council setting up whatever rules it wants to have informally of the discussion
6:43 am
in executive committee. we think there should be a two month mentoring program for someone interested in serving on the council. we should make that three months or six months of chairing the committee. we don't need to decide that now. it is not something that appears in the bylaws. in a sense incorporating the concept gives you more freedom rather than trying to thrash this particular concept out here at this meeting. there is nothing to prevent the council from having a role. cr rule. >> chair: is there anyone uncomfortable with the proposed amendment as it is written?
6:44 am
>> maybe i can talk a little bit about it. >> chair: i want to announce you. >> i think it's good -- to have different councilmembers take a leadership. i don't know how to word it, sorry. as far as making a motion to make this change. i don't know how to word it. maybe staff can assist us. >> chair: director johnson? >> councilmember wong, wasn't your intent to make a motion to adopt the proposed
6:45 am
amendment as written to set a term limit of two consecutive terms? >> yes. >> the motion is already on the floor. >> it sounds like you are affirming the motion and a second. >> technically speaking, the friendly amendment has to be withdrawn at this point. >> it is withdrawn. >> i like to call the question. >> chair: so we have a public comment within motion in the second. the discussion is complete? we agree on that. seeing no public comment, we vote.
6:46 am
all those in favor? of the proposed amendment say aye, and raise your right hand. >> aye. >> those opposed, say nay and raise your right hand. abstained? >> chair: the motion passes. now we are on to article 3. number b >> yeah, it passed! i was afraid we would get out of here saturday. >> chair: my last duty as co-chair, if one co-chair cannot attend
6:47 am
one or more meetings the other co-chair can appoint a temporary replacement. we are open for discussion. >> i motion. >> councilmember wilson seconds, and councilmember supanich has discussion. >> i do. i don't have a problem with the cochair choosing someone at the discretion - the way it is worded, if one cochair cannot attend one or more meetings, i think he would be okay for
6:48 am
the other cochair to appoint someone for a month but beyond that, i would like to see fuller council involvement, say someone is to take a leave of absence, so the whole council can provide input, and unnecessarily have a person chosen for a long-term. if you give me a second, i will try to come up with wording. >> chair: that makes sense to me. it would ensure the value of the council's vote and who the leader is, not just one person. for more than one month.
6:49 am
>> should we change the wording to one month? or the current month? would that be easier? instead of one or more meetings. >> chair: tag a line that says, not to exceed one month duration. >> what about, not to exceed two consecutive meetings. >> i would be happy with that. >> that would be a regular meeting and an executive meeting. >> >> chair: could you repeat that mr. stein? >> if no cochair is present at a meeting, the meeting can be chaired by another member of the council and that is a loosey-goosey term.
6:50 am
we need to deal with if we have one cochair present, to keep that cochair continuing to chair. if there is no cochair present, another member of the council can chair, and stay within the bylaws. >> i choose to amend the motion, to include a limit of two months for a cochair-appointed replacement. >> should we say, not to exceed two consecutive meetings? m d c meetings. c>> chair: do you approve of that friendly amendment?
6:51 am
councilmember wilson seconds the friendly amendment. everyone is clear? public comment? all in favor of the amendment proposal please raise your right hand and say aye. any opposed? abstained? that was not very painful. (laughter) we have a few more items. we are running short on time. is there any potential for extended time today? five minutes. thank you. the next item is a report from the disability disaster
6:52 am
preparedness committee. >> thank you cochair parsons. >> chair: delivered by councilmember senhaux. >> disability disaster preparedness committee met on friday. there was a follow-up discussion on the shakeout activities that took place in october 18 and a disability specific activities. the mayor's disability council conducted an activation deal with the sou partners by text messaging the identifying contacts. the results were impressive. there was 100% response within 12 hours. we also discussed the civic center evacuation drill on october 25, about 10 buildings in the civic center area evacuated including city hall, the department of public
6:53 am
health, and the war memorial building. as part of the evacuation drill, an ada portion the place as well where buildings that had to evacuate people with disabilities and use the evacuation chairs. the activity went well but it highlighted some areas of further staff training with the mayor's office and disability will follow up on. update on the planning efforts on the golden guardian, disaster exercise in may 2013, there was discussion to establish a timeframe from the project and further develop the deal for including participation of people with disabilities in the exercise. one of the main objectives of the exercise was to see how effective -- the shelter plan will work. there was discussion of the committee to limit the scope of the exercise for best results.
6:54 am
we discussed the fema innovation challenge grant. we propose to project to develop a disaster preparedness plan. mld will be dubbed five the results by the end of november. finally there was a lively discussion around disaster messaging. we look for examples of other messages from other jurisdictions. we looked at what was used for hurricane sandy. the goal was to ensure clear and effective disaster messaging to the public including the disability community. take a breath. several committee members have committed to do the above research and develop tax messaging samples for the committee to review at our next meeting. this concludes my ddpc report;
6:55 am
i would like to remind members of the public and organizations that our group now meets the first friday of every other month; the next scheduled meeting is on january 4, 2013, 1-3:30 p.m. room 421 at city hall. we hope to see you there. >> chair: thank you very much. councilmember senhaux. our next item, report from the smpta, multi-motor accessibility advisory committee presented by councilmember wong. >> councilmember wong: today i will update the council and the public of two projects. podesta and accessible signals;
6:56 am
-- provided information about pedestrian signals referred to as apc. special pedestrian pushbuttons at intersections to visually impaired, audible speech and tactile messages. apms are currently placed at 129 intersections. 29 to be installed in the next 2-3 years. how aps are prioritized? crosswalk length program for visually impaired. city/public programs. proximity to transit facility. speed limit. examples of upcoming aps
6:57 am
installation locations. 19th ave. and l inconln way. 25th ave. at - . sometimes people cannot hear the countdown. these devices can be adjusted by staff. number two, complete streets. this project is in early-stage. seeks to implement aesthetic and safety improvements or users of -- street between mcallister and union streets. in accordance with the city
6:58 am
transit policy, improvements will primarily focus on - polk street. it is slated to be resurfaced and repaved sometime in 2015. saturday, december 1, 2012, an open house will reveal conceptual designs. time and location to be determined. the next sfmta meeting is scheduled for thursday, december 20, 2012, at sfmta headquarters located at -- the corner of south and -- 7th floor. i wish everybody a happy thanksgiving. thank you. >> chair: we have -
6:59 am
we are skipping down public comment. seeing none. information items from staff? seeing none, item 14 is discussion item. i have one announcement. i would like to say quickly, ctap, who distributes accessible telephones the blind and deaf phones, they are located across the bay, they're coming to san francisco for distribution at the hearing and speech center on dec. 14th. this contact bob davies at the hearing and speech center if you would like to return your equipment. find out what equipment is available to you. we don't always have the opportunity in san francisco. is a great opportunity. it is a joint effort of the

December 3, 2012 6:30am-7:00am PST

TOPIC FREQUENCY Wilson 6, Us 2, San Francisco 2, Mr. Stein 2, Sfmta 1, Ctap 1, Pushbuttons 1, Aps 1, Guardian 1, Apc 1, Fema 1, Kim 1, Vacated 1, The M D C Bylawys 1, City Hall 1, Wong 1, Stein 1, Sandy 1, Bob Davies 1, Senhaux 1
Network SFGTV
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 528
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color